|
PROTECT IP threatens the future of DNS security
|
|
The following comments relate to this news article:
article published on 25 August, 2011
PROTECT IP is the name of a bill which is working its way through the US Senate with a version also expected to be introduced in the House of Representatives next month. It would require the Attorney General's office to compile of list of domain names which DNS operators (in the US) will be required to block.
According to some critics, it threatens to undo more than a decade of Internet ... [ read the full article ]
Please read the original article before posting your comments.
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
26. August 2011 @ 03:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
Protect IP is such a terrible, ill-conceived idea that it is sure to pass. That way, there will be a spike in cyber crime and the citizenry will demand that more of their online freedoms are taken away. Why else would a bunch of know-nothing politicians keep pushing it after it is abundantly clear that it will only cause crime?
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
26. August 2011 @ 12:24 |
Link to this message
|
|
If this garbage goes through there will be a such a shitstorm of hacking & thrashing of government servers the likes they've never known.
Sure they want to stop piracy, but to the extent of invoking unconstitutional law? Despite my intentions, I'll be damned if I'll allow someone to censor what I can/cannot say, see or do.
|
Senior Member
|
26. August 2011 @ 19:04 |
Link to this message
|
|
More trying to put the Genie back in the bottle.
It doesn't matter what they try, the net will adapt and they will accomplish nothing.
Much better to reduce controls so everyone is on an even playing field. This is the net's strength.
Oh, Im sorry... Did the middle of my sentence interrupt the beginning of yours?
|
AfterDawn Addict
1 product review
|
27. August 2011 @ 01:54 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by LordRuss:
If this garbage goes through there will be a such a shitstorm of hacking & thrashing of government servers the likes they've never known.
Sure they want to stop piracy, but to the extent of invoking unconstitutional law? Despite my intentions, I'll be damned if I'll allow someone to censor what I can/cannot say, see or do.
According to the constitution, the president may not wage war for more than 3 months without congressional approval. When the war with Libya went longer than 3 months without congressional approval, this was an act of treason on the part of the president...or it would have been if the constitution was not already null and void. Neither the judiciary nor congress have done anything about this matter, so clearly none of the three branches of the government consider the constitution to be in effect.
|
Member
|
27. August 2011 @ 10:20 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by LordRuss:
If this garbage goes through there will be a such a shitstorm of hacking & thrashing of government servers the likes they've never known.
Sure they want to stop piracy, but to the extent of invoking unconstitutional law? Despite my intentions, I'll be damned if I'll allow someone to censor what I can/cannot say, see or do.
According to the constitution, the president may not wage war for more than 3 months without congressional approval. When the war with Libya went longer than 3 months without congressional approval, this was an act of treason on the part of the president...or it would have been if the constitution was not already null and void. Neither the judiciary nor congress have done anything about this matter, so clearly none of the three branches of the government consider the constitution to be in effect.
Not like they've bothered to do it since WW2 anyways. Why start for just an "Military Action"?
www.inebriare.com
Xbox Live: Rogue Jello - PSN: bam431 - IGN: bam431
Youtube: electrowaffle - Twitter: bam431
i5 760, P7P55D-E, Vapor-X HD5770, 8GB DDR3, 1TB HDD,
|
Senior Member
1 product review
|
27. August 2011 @ 14:13 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Neither the judiciary nor congress have done anything about this matter, so clearly none of the three branches of the government consider the constitution to be in effect.
The only time it becomes an issue is when someone's wallet is attacked. Unless the public calls them (idiots basically self appointed in charge) on their stupidity & tar & feather them for their behavior, nothing will ever change.
|
|
Advertisement
|
|
|
Member
12 product reviews
|
17. September 2011 @ 23:22 |
Link to this message
|
Originally posted by KillerBug:
Originally posted by LordRuss:
If this garbage goes through there will be a such a shitstorm of hacking & thrashing of government servers the likes they've never known.
Sure they want to stop piracy, but to the extent of invoking unconstitutional law? Despite my intentions, I'll be damned if I'll allow someone to censor what I can/cannot say, see or do.
According to the constitution, the president may not wage war for more than 3 months without congressional approval. When the war with Libya went longer than 3 months without congressional approval, this was an act of treason on the part of the president...or it would have been if the constitution was not already null and void. Neither the judiciary nor congress have done anything about this matter, so clearly none of the three branches of the government consider the constitution to be in effect.
No KillerBug, the US Constitution says no such thing. The Constitution says that the president is the commander in chief of the military, and that the Congress has the power to declare war. There is a federal law called the War Powers Resolution that limits how long the president can deploy soldiers without a declaration of war or without Congressional consent. That law has NEVER been tested in the courts because neither side has ever challenged it--fearing whose side the Supreme Court would take.
|
